Well, let me know if you want to try a title at a time, see if I can guess your taste with some clues.
And one thing to keep in mind, which I have to constantly remind myself of around here: for every person who posts something negative because they don’t really understand where you’re coming from, there are thousands of people who don’t. If that makes sense. I keep hearing that one lone voice who refuses to see reason as the collective voice of the Dope, when they’re really nothing more than the collective voice of their own ass. Hard to remember, but worthwhile.
THIS has soured you? You were sour to start. **CrazyCatLady ** summed it up very well. Perhaps you would have been better off starting a poll in IMHO.
FWIW, I wouldn’t like to learn to like classic movies in an assignment form, either–I can think of little else that would turn me off of movies all together. Old movie buffs* can be off-putting when neophytes try to express their own opinions (not really directed at** lissener**, just a general point), but again, by your own admission, you wanted your POV validated by others. Since I don’t share your POV, I can’t do that. I have said several times that you are welcome to watch (or not watch, given your queue) whatever you want.
*I don’t consider myself an old movie buff. I don’t care who produced what or who lit what, who rewrote which screenplay etc. But I do like films and IMO, to dismiss several decades of some of Hollywood’s greatest achievements because you find them “cheesy” tells me more about you than it does about the films.
I was more indifferent than anything, to start. I’d lean away from an old movie but not go out of my way to avoid it if someone recommended one or wanted to see it with me. I’d not choose to watch an old movie on my own, 99 times out of 100, but not feel sour against them. Right now I’d probably be such that I couldn’t be objective and I’d just dislike the movie regardless, hence I’m soured. It will pass.
As to the rest, I still don’t think you understand the point of my OP and I am tired of trying to explain it to you. I’ll give it this final shot and then I’m done: I feel uncultured having this reaction (“it’s so cheesy!”) to old movies, and yet it’s how they tend to make me react. I wondered if anyone else found themselves in this position. I.e., of feeling uncultured for not enjoying old movies. YOU seem to be taking it as me trying to find out if other people don’t like old movies, which it wasn’t. I can see how you would get that from the title alone, but the OP I felt explained it.
You didn’t explain it like that at all, but ok–that’s what you meant.
And now you have another “reason” to dislike old movies: this thread. Our support of classic film has soured you on the entire genre and you can’t be objective now (why would you need to be objective about a movie? They are generally made to appeal first to your emotions and then [if they’re any good at all] your intellect).
It all sounds very like “I’m going to take my toys and go home now”, but I have no interest in pursuing this matter anymore, either. If you ever watch an old movie and find you like it, it’d be nice if you started a thread about it.
Hell, I slammed OpalCat very early on in the thread, but I was able to understand her motives after a few clarifying posts. Why are y’all making such a big hairy deal out of this?
I just finished it last night. Fun movie. Now I know why you shouldn’t swim less than an hour after eating. I wondered if Ellen was reading Richard’s book on the train in order to meet him, or if it was really a coincidence. A small correction for valleyofthedolls: Gene Tierney was nominated for an Oscar, but she didn’t win it - she lost to Joan Crawford in Mildred Pierce.
A coincidence. In the book, she doesn’t notice that Richard is the book’s author until they get off the train and the Robies introduce them. They hardly spoke at all on the train – she fell asleep reading the book, it drops on the floor, and Richard gives it back to her. That’s when she tells him he looks like her father, but she hadn’t put two and two together until they’re introduced.
The movie makes it seem like Richard pursues Ellen, but it was really the other way around. He thinks she’s beautiful but there’s something about her that puts him off. He doesn’t like her very much but she’s irresistible. It’s very much a spider-fly thing.
I don’t buy this. Rosenbaum is as much into promoting obscurities as he is making canons. When he includes real obscurities like Love Streams, The Scenic Route, Last Chants for a Slow Dance, or Wanda, I don’t think it has anything to do with pretending these films are greater than anything on the AFI list, it’s more the celebration of titles that are genuinely good and would be forgotten to history were it not for…well, a figure like Rosenbaum being there to champion them. And if he were really trying to “impress” us, why include such famous titles as Eraserhead or Scarface alongside the less well-known films?
My husband and I have recently seen Casablanca in a theater.
It is SO much better on the big screen.
Same thing with How The West Was Won. (shown in cinerama - a three camera and three projector screening -AMAZING)
It’s a Mad Mad World.
And other theater showings of classics.
When you’ve only experienced classic movies on television and not in a theater, I think the experience suffers.
Try the BIG screen experience, if you ever have the opportunity.
See that’s the position I usually take, but some people are somehow offended when they find out there are movies out there they haven’t hear of. This entirely flummoxes me. To take Rosenbaum’s list as an implied criticism of ignorance, rather than a gift, is utterly non-computatious to me.
As Rosenbaum explains in the accompanying article, he believes–as I do–that such lists should be education; experience-expanding–rather than simply self-congratulatory marketing tools for Blockbuster. A wholly legitimate criticism.
I’m still seeing it as self-conscious. It didn’t want the reader to think, “That sounds like some movies I should check out.” I felt it wanted him to think, “Boy, that Jonathan Rosenbaum really knows his movies.”
This is just so ridiculous. Howbout before I decide if the content of any of your posts has any value, I’ll psychoanalyze them to determine what your motivation *really *is for posting (completely ignoring the inarguable fact that such analyses are subject to my own insecurities and projections, and that I can never know the entire context from which to make such judgments). And then I’ll simply dismiss anything you have to say without ever acknowledging–let alone addressing–the actual content of your posts.
That’s you as the reader, and whatever psychological motives you’re bringing to it. That aside, it’s obvious that he does really know his movies, and he knows that, but he channels his knowledge into helping others learn about cool things they wouldn’t have otherwise. One can either be bitter about it and go catch Sex and the City 2 or take lists like this as a learning opportunity. Rosenbaum’s lists really are invaluable.
Out of curiousity, would anyone be interested in forming a viewing group: old movies for people who usually don’t like old movies? I’d like to give a couple of old movies a month a shot, and it’d be interesting if other people did too, so we could discuss if we liked them or not. There will be fewer TV threads over the summer, so so couple threads a month shouldn’t annoy too much.
Anyway, my picks for June are going to be Gaslight and Carnival of Souls (since I have those on hand and haven’t seen them yet) if anyone cares to join me.
If there’s an interest in doing it, I’d be happy to take some suggestions. My own ideas include watching things like The Quatermass Xperiment and other movies that aren’t typically on the top 100 lists.
Well if you read the thread you’ll see I’m not a fan of mainstream top 100 lists either. But I have some specific suggestions for “classics for newbies” of my own, as I offered upthread. But I don’t want to horn in on yours. We’d probably have different suggestions anyway. As much as I love Carnival of Souls, for example, its production values require some overlooking, so it may be outside the immediate comfort levels of many people who already look at older films as less polished than new films. It’s very much a Z-grade indie. All three of your titles have horror elements too, and if I were programming a classics “seminar” I’d probably mix it up a little, genre-wise. So anyway, my offer from upthread still stands for anyone who wants some suggestions of “classics for newbies,” and it looks like elfkin will be another such resource.
I’d probably start with movies that had high production values and compelling drama–indeed, like ***Gaslight ***(the remake, not the original), and maybe The Best Years of Our Lives or Dodsworth. Some comedies, like Palm Beach Story, The Thin Man, My Man Godfrey, To Be or Not to Be. A couple of noirs–Leave Her to Heaven, Laura, Angel Face, Out of the Past, something along those lines. . . .
Going OT so I’ll keep this short but you wouldn’t put A Matter of Life and Death in a list of old movies to start off with? Just asking b/c it’s a movie I dearly love but I never see on top ten lists.